IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/eujhec/v15y2014i1p5-11.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Statistical and regulatory considerations in assessments of interchangeability of biological drug products

Author

Listed:
  • Lászlo Tóthfalusi
  • László Endrényi
  • Shein-Chung Chow

Abstract

When the patent of a brand-name, marketed drug expires, new, generic products are usually offered. Small-molecule generic and originator drug products are expected to be chemically identical. Their pharmaceutical similarity can be typically assessed by simple regulatory criteria such as the expectation that the 90 % confidence interval for the ratio of geometric means of some pharmacokinetic parameters be between 0.80 and 1.25. When such criteria are satisfied, the drug products are generally considered to exhibit therapeutic equivalence. They are then usually interchanged freely within individual patients. Biological drugs are complex proteins, for instance, because of their large size, intricate structure, sensitivity to environmental conditions, difficult manufacturing procedures, and the possibility of immunogenicity. Generic and brand-name biologic products can be expected to show only similarity but not identity in their various features and clinical effects. Consequently, the determination of biosimilarity is also a complicated process which involves assessment of the totality of the evidence for the close similarity of the two products. Moreover, even when biosimilarity has been established, it may not be assumed that the two biosimilar products can be automatically substituted by pharmacists. This generally requires additional, careful considerations. Without declaring interchangeability, a new product could be prescribed, i.e. it is prescribable. However, two products can be automatically substituted only if they are interchangeable. Interchangeability is a statistical term and it means that products can be used in any order in the same patient without considering the treatment history. The concepts of interchangeability and prescribability have been widely discussed in the past but only in relation to small molecule generics. In this paper we apply these concepts to biosimilars and we discuss: definitions of prescribability and interchangeability and their statistical implementation; the relation between bioequivalence and interchangeability for small-molecule drug products; regulatory requirements and expectations of biosimilar products in various jurisdictions; possible statistical approaches to establish the similarity and interchangeability of biologic drug products; definition of other technical terms such as switchability and automatic substitution. The paper will be concluded with a discussion of the anticipated future use of interchangeability of biological drug products. Copyright Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014

Suggested Citation

  • Lászlo Tóthfalusi & László Endrényi & Shein-Chung Chow, 2014. "Statistical and regulatory considerations in assessments of interchangeability of biological drug products," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 15(1), pages 5-11, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:eujhec:v:15:y:2014:i:1:p:5-11
    DOI: 10.1007/s10198-014-0589-1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s10198-014-0589-1
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10198-014-0589-1?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dag Dalen & Steinar Strøm & Tonje Haabeth, 2006. "Price regulation and generic competition in the pharmaceutical market," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 7(3), pages 204-211, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Valentin Brodszky & Petra Baji & Orsolya Balogh & Márta Péntek, 2014. "Budget impact analysis of biosimilar infliximab (CT-P13) for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis in six Central and Eastern European countries," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 15(1), pages 65-71, May.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Håkonsen, Helle & Horn, Anne Marie & Toverud, Else-Lydia, 2009. "Price control as a strategy for pharmaceutical cost containment--What has been achieved in Norway in the period 1994-2004?," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 90(2-3), pages 277-285, May.
    2. Kaiser, Ulrich & Mendez, Susan J. & Rønde, Thomas & Ullrich, Hannes, 2014. "Regulation of pharmaceutical prices: Evidence from a reference price reform in Denmark," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 174-187.
    3. Ivan Moreno-Torres, 2011. "Generic drugs in Spain: price competition vs. moral hazard," Working Papers XREAP2011-04, Xarxa de Referència en Economia Aplicada (XREAP), revised May 2011.
    4. Serra-Sastre, Victoria & Bianchi, Simona & Mestre-Ferrandiz, Jorge & O’Neill, Phill, 2021. "Does NICE influence the adoption and uptake of generics in the UK?," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 113639, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    5. Birg, Laura, 2019. "Reference pricing and parallel imports: Evidence from Germany," University of Göttingen Working Papers in Economics 362, University of Goettingen, Department of Economics.
    6. Fernando Antoñanzas & Carmelo Juárez-Castelló & Roberto Rodríguez-Ibeas, 2011. "Innovation, loyalty and generic competition in pharmaceutical markets," SERIEs: Journal of the Spanish Economic Association, Springer;Spanish Economic Association, vol. 2(1), pages 75-95, March.
    7. Carine Franc & Laurent Granier & Sébastien Trinquard, 2013. "Tarif forfaitaire de responsabilité : quels impacts sur le pharmacien ?," Working Papers halshs-00800457, HAL.
    8. Ivan Moreno-Torres, 2011. "What if there was a stronger pharmaceutical price competition in Spain? When regulation has a similar effect to collusion," Working Papers XREAP2011-02, Xarxa de Referència en Economia Aplicada (XREAP), revised May 2011.
    9. Brekke, Kurt R. & Grasdal, Astrid L. & Holms, Tor Helge, 2009. "Regulation and pricing of pharmaceuticals: Reference pricing or price cap regulation?," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 53(2), pages 170-185, February.
    10. Ville Aalto-Setälä, 2008. "The impact of generic substitution on price competition in Finland," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 9(2), pages 185-191, May.
    11. Liu, Ya-Ming & Yang, Yea-Huei Kao & Hsieh, Chee-Ruey, 2012. "Regulation and competition in the Taiwanese pharmaceutical market under national health insurance," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 471-483.
    12. Victoria Serra-Sastre & Simona Bianchi & Jorge Mestre-Ferrandiz & Phill O’Neill, 2021. "Does NICE influence the adoption and uptake of generics in the UK?," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 22(2), pages 229-242, March.
    13. Kanavos, Panos, 2014. "Measuring performance in off-patent drug markets: A methodological framework and empirical evidence from twelve EU Member States," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 118(2), pages 229-241.
    14. Dag Dalen & Kari Furu & Marilena Locatelli & Steinar Strøm, 2011. "Generic substitution: micro evidence from register data in Norway," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 12(1), pages 49-59, February.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Bioequivalence; Equivalence tests; Follow-on biologics; Biosimilars; Interchangeability; I1; Y8;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • I1 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health
    • Y8 - Miscellaneous Categories - - Related Disciplines

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:eujhec:v:15:y:2014:i:1:p:5-11. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.